Nov 13, 2007 Cormac Lawler wrote:

"How do Wikiversity and Wikibooks relate to eachother (and within this: do they overlap unnecessarily, and how might they be aligned most productively)?"

The English language Wikiversity and English language Wikibooks were estabolished by the Foundation as sister projects with distinct missions. I believe that they could have been "aligned most productively" by leaving Wikiversity within the Wikibooks project. However, Wikibooks was given a narrow mission and the participants who started developing the "Wikiversity-type elements" were told to go away. Now that they are sister projects with distinct missions it is simple to hyper-link Wikiversity learning resources and textbooks at Wikibooks. For example, learning projects at Wikiversity link to textbooks hosted by Wikibooks, just as they link to articles at Wikipedia.

Wikiversity participants can help develop textbooks located at Wikibooks. However, speaking only for myself, I find the strict Wikibooks policy against original research to be crippling to my efforts to develop learning resources. In my view, a reliable and useful textbook requires significant input from experts who know the subject and have experience interacting with the intended readers of the textbook in a learning environment that allows the textbook creators to intimately know the target audience of learners. A good textbook is the result of original research; it involves secondary research and insightful original synthesis of previously published ideas. Also, I think some aspects conventional textbooks are artifacts of publishing on paper and not optimal for a wiki-format learning resource. I'm interested in experimenting with new formats for learning resources that mix internet-mediated social interactivity with more traditional textbook-like content. In short, I am more comfortable working to developing learning resources under the rules of Wikiversity than under the more restrictive rules of Wikibooks.

It does not surprise me to hear that the Dutch Wikibooks has extended their scope in order to host lesson plans and pedagogic guidance for using textbooks. I feel that giving Wikibooks a narrow mission modeled on the narrow Wikipedia mission was a decision made by executive fiat and without proper input from people in the Wikimedia community who had experience develop textbooks and other learning resources. Is this a problem? I would not be surprised if some language-specific Wikibooks communities continue, for many years to come, to sometimes decide that Wikibooks should have a broader mission that makes room for Wikiversity-type elements. Yes, this could turn out to be a problem. For example, after a couple years, Jimbo could hear about what is going on and "lower the boom" on the Dutch Wikibooks. If several years have gone by with development of Wikiversity-type elements in the Dutch Wikibooks, it will be very painful to have to surgically remove those elements.

Teemu Leinonen wrote:

"Wikiversity should give-up the "content production" and focus on hosting communities of learners who want to do things together."

The fact is, there are many types of "content" (learning resources) that are only allowed in Wikiversity. This is why Wikiversity was kicked out of Wikibooks. Wikiversity will always be a place to develop educational content that is not welcome at other Wikimedia Foundation wikis. If the idea (Wikiversity should give-up the content production) is to broaden the mission of Wikibooks so as to include the content that is now only allowed at Wikiversity, it seems like that should have been the choice made years ago. It is incredibly destructive when people who do not do the hard work of developing the wiki content feel free to play ping pong by executive decree...."move this content all to Wikiversity...oh, no, that's not right, now move it all back to Wikibooks". Everything is just a link away in the wikisphere. Please, let's stop shuffling the deck chairs and just do the real work that needs to be done. I agree that there should be special emphasis on the development of collaborative learning communities at Wikiversity. Having learning communities and developing learning resources are not two distinct things.

Leigh Blackall wrote:

"With the likes of Wikiversity, and even Wikibooks, the brief is far less clear and the structure of content or point of entry is even less clear."

Jimbo's said it well at Wikimania 2006: "..... the idea here is to also host learning communities, so people who are actually trying to learn, actually have a place to come and interact and help each other figure out how to learn things. We're also going to be hosting and fostering research into how these kinds of things can be used more effectively."

Most people are indoctrinated into conventional learning as done at conventional schools. Wikiversity is a platform for experimenting with things like using wiki and other new technologies to make possible collaborative "learn by doing" projects. Yes, at Wikiversity the "structure of content" is much more open to innovation and experimentation than at Wikipedia. That might make some people nervous. I find it liberating and the path to our future.

See also: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt/Blog/13_November_2007

-John Schmidt (user JWSchmidt)